IDF Rejects Claims in 'Noz'a' Film on Gaza Strikes
Translated & summarized from N12 by baba
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- IDF rejects 'Noz'a' film's portrayal of Gaza targeting as distorted.
- Military denies AI independently selects targets or 'Lavender' is an approved database.
- IDF refutes claims of pre-approved civilian casualty numbers for strikes.
- The army states evacuation warnings do not permit indiscriminate attacks.
- IDF suggests film interviewees had incomplete understanding of targeting process.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has issued a detailed response to the film 'Noz'a', systematically rejecting numerous claims made about its targeting processes during the Gaza war. The military asserts the film presents a "distorted, misleading, and unrealistic picture of the targeting process in the IDF," based on "substantial factual errors" and a "perverted and manipulative" portrayal.
The IDF's response was formulated after military representatives were able to view the film, initially at a screening in Bologna, Italy, after attempts to obtain a copy failed. The military contends that artificial intelligence does not independently select targets and that the 'Lavender' system is not an approved target database but rather a data tool for intelligence researchers.
Furthermore, the IDF explicitly denies claims that fixed numbers of civilian casualties were pre-approved for strikes based on target importance, stating that mandatory IDF directives never automatically authorized strikes endangering a predetermined number of civilians. The military also refutes allegations of approving strikes with expected high civilian casualties, asserting that no attack was planned or executed with an anticipated 500 or near-500 civilian deaths.
The IDF also addressed the film's portrayal of evacuation warnings, clarifying that issuing such warnings does not grant permission for indiscriminate strikes. According to the military, civilian presence and risks continue to be assessed even after an evacuation order, and potential harm is evaluated before any strike is approved.
The IDF suggested that interviewees in the film, many of whom served in military intelligence, may have only witnessed limited, early stages of the intelligence process and lacked a full understanding of the entire decision-making chain, which involves operational planners, legal advisors, and commanders.
Finally, the IDF criticized the filmmakers for not submitting their claims for review and response before publication and for not providing a copy of the film to the military after its screening, despite requests. The military acknowledged that errors and mistakes do occur in combat and that suspected violations of law or orders are investigated, potentially leading to disciplinary or criminal proceedings.
Read the original at N12
